[PFormaini]

Here is a fascinating puzzle I came across last evening.....

Can you construct a full 52-card deal in which:

1. NORTH-SOUTH are cold for a GRAND SLAM in SPADES on any lead or defense.

But by exchanging 1 card of NORTH'S with 1 card of WEST's...

2. EAST-WEST can now take 10 tricks in SPADES on defense?


HINT #1: Neither SOUTH nor EAST is void in any suit.

[gwnn]

um sorry for nitpicking but looks like it's just a 10 trick swing. who is declarer?

[Fluffy]

HINT: one of the cards you switch is probably trump ace

[PFormaini]

gwnn, on Jan 24 2010, 07:09 PM, said:

um sorry for nitpicking but looks like it's just a 10 trick swing. who is declarer?

No.

It is a 23 trick swing.

In case 1 - N-S take all 13 tricks.

In case 2 - E-W take 10 tricks.

That is a 23 trick swing from N-S tp E-W - all after a simple exchange of a single card from N to W.

[gwnn]

well yes it's like there is a 40 day swing from 20 january to 20 february.

EW took 0 tricks initially and 10 tricks later. how is that not a 10 trick swing?

anyway, who is declarer?

[PFormaini]

gwnn, on Jan 24 2010, 08:15 PM, said:

well yes it's like there is a 40 day swing from 20 january to 20 february.

EW took 0 tricks initially and 10 tricks later. how is that not a 10 trick swing?

anyway, who is declarer?

There is a 23-trick 'swing'.

N-S take 23 fewer tricks between set-up 1 and set-up 2.

If N-S took 13 tricks in the first and only 3 in the second - THAT would be a "10-trick difference'. 'Difference' applies to one particluar side. 'Swing' refers to the total number of tricks by both sides combined.

Geeze - did IQs just suddenly drop sharply?

ANyway, SOUTH is usually the declarer in puzzles of this type. And WEST the opening leader.

That holds true here. For both set-ups.

For Heaven's Sake people - stop nitpicking and solve the damn puzzle!1 It isn't THAT hard!!!

Once you figure out how the Spades have to be satisfy both conditions, the rest kinda falls into place.

[shyams]

Not today, don't feel like it. Sorry

Busy watching the NFC Championship game...

[gwnn]

hi, my IQ has always been relatively low but nowadays I post more and people like mikeh post less. however, I am still relatively OK with basic math like subtraction.

NS took 13 tricks in layout 1.
EW took 10 tricks in layout 2, hence NS took 3.

13-3 is not 23. it is 10.
http://www.wolframal...m/input/?i=13-3

well OK I guess I was joking about being relatively OK with basic math, I had to look it up!

I will think about your problem but it was not quite clear who was declarer.

edit: on further review of your kind reply, I still don't understand how you arrive at the 23 figure. Looks like NS has lost 10 tricks and EW won 10 tricks. isn't that 20 then?

[PFormaini]

gwnn, on Jan 24 2010, 08:29 PM, said:

hi, my IQ has always been relatively low but nowadays I post more and people like mikeh post less. however, I am still relatively OK with basic math like subtraction.

NS took 13 tricks in layout 1.
EW took 10 tricks in layout 2, hence NS took 3.

13-3 is not 23. it is 10.
http://www.wolframal...m/input/?i=13-3

well OK I guess I was joking about being relatively OK with basic math, I had to look it up!

I will think about your problem but it was not quite clear who was declarer.

SOUTH is declarer both times.

Another hint: East/WEST take the FIRST 10 tricks in set-up #2. In fact, it has to be that way.

[bb79]

cayuga strikes again


gwnn
what op says is you made 13 in 1, down 10 next one so 13- (-10) =23
just like if you were down 1, there were 14 trick swing

[gwnn]

PFormaini, on Jan 25 2010, 01:24 AM, said:

'Swing' refers to the total number of tricks by both sides combined.

isn't that constant at 13, assuming no revokes?

[PFormaini]

gwnn, on Jan 24 2010, 08:48 PM, said:

PFormaini, on Jan 25 2010, 01:24 AM, said:

'Swing' refers to the total number of tricks by both sides combined.

isn't that constant at 13, assuming no revokes?

Enough stalling, people.

Solve the problem!!!!!

[shyams]

PFormaini, on Jan 25 2010, 01:50 AM, said:

Enough stalling, people.

Solve the problem!!!!!

Sounds more like a command than a general request...

I think I solved this problem; but now I refuse to post the solution.

In any case, it teaches nothing...

[PFormaini]

shyams, on Jan 24 2010, 09:08 PM, said:

PFormaini, on Jan 25 2010, 01:50 AM, said:

Enough stalling, people.

Solve the problem!!!!! 

Sounds more like a command than a general request...

I think I solved this problem; but now I refuse to post the solution.

In any case, it teaches nothing...

"I think I solved the problem, but now I refuse to post....."

I gotta remember that one the next time I take an exam and don;t know the answer!!!!

[shyams]

Let's see how many actual solutions are posted; by people other than you.

I really wish no one bothers.

[PFormaini]

shyams, on Jan 24 2010, 09:12 PM, said:

Let's see how many actual solutions are posted; by people other than you.

I really wish no one bothers.

We understand, shy.

You don't have the necessary skills.

That's OK. I'm sure someone else can work it out. After all, it was in the 'Intermediate' portion of the book.

[kenrexford]

I'm just thinking. Since "13 tricks" is an artificial wall, exactly how much is the swing? I mean, we see deals all the time where there are "17 tricks available." If you change this or that, you still end up with 13 tricks as to the artificial barrier. So, if you suddenly end up with only 3 tricks, you'd need a lot of tricks outside of the barrier to have a 23-trick swing. Actually, 26.

That seems fairly easy to have happen. Simply put, either side has 13 tricks. The trouble of transportation is illusory. For the entry to, say, a 7-card suit headed by the, say, AKQ could be the stiff Jack, such that the Jack could either be simply a trick or an entry.

Constructing, therefore, a deal with 26 tricks available would be easy. 26 seems like the absolute maximum, though, because there are only 26 cards with which to work.

Making that 26-trick layout reduce to 3, though, seems really hard.

[PFormaini]

kenrexford, on Jan 24 2010, 09:27 PM, said:

I'm just thinking. Since "13 tricks" is an artificial wall, exactly how much is the swing? I mean, we see deals all the time where there are "17 tricks available." If you change this or that, you still end up with 13 tricks as to the artificial barrier. So, if you suddenly end up with only 3 tricks, you'd need a lot of tricks outside of the barrier to have a 23-trick swing. Actually, 26.

That seems fairly easy to have happen. Simply put, either side has 13 tricks. The trouble of transportation is illusory. For the entry to, say, a 7-card suit headed by the, say, AKQ could be the stiff Jack, such that the Jack could either be simply a trick or an entry.

Constructing, therefore, a deal with 26 tricks available would be easy. 26 seems like the absolute maximum, though, because there are only 26 cards with which to work.

Making that 26-trick layout reduce to 3, though, seems really hard.

ken:

Actually, once you work out what the trump suit has to be to satisfy each condition - and then proceed from there, it becomes remarkably easy to construct the deal.

One merely has to ask oneself how South can lose so many tricks OUTSIDE the trump suit in the second example. There's really only 1 way to arrange for it to happen.

But I agree - it is the initial set of conditions that is the tough nut to crack.

But it is possible. And elegant.

[Mbodell]

PFormaini, on Jan 24 2010, 05:24 PM, said:

gwnn, on Jan 24 2010, 08:15 PM, said:

well yes it's like there is a 40 day swing from 20 january to 20 february.

EW took 0 tricks initially and 10 tricks later. how is that not a 10 trick swing?

anyway, who is declarer?

There is a 23-trick 'swing'.

N-S take 23 fewer tricks between set-up 1 and set-up 2.

Um, 23 fewer tricks? I don't think so. They took 13 tricks in setup 1. 23 fewer would be -10. They didn't take -10 tricks, they took 3 tricks. That is a swing of 10 tricks.

If I play 1nt= I, declarer, took 7 tricks and my opponents took 6. If instead at the other table they play 1nt-1 declarer took 6 tricks and opponents took 7. That is a swing of 1 trick from declarer to defender. That isn't a swing of 13 tricks!

[PFormaini]

Mbodell, on Jan 24 2010, 10:36 PM, said:

PFormaini, on Jan 24 2010, 05:24 PM, said:

gwnn, on Jan 24 2010, 08:15 PM, said:

well yes it's like there is a 40 day swing from 20 january to 20 february.

EW took 0 tricks initially and 10 tricks later. how is that not a 10 trick swing?

anyway, who is declarer?

There is a 23-trick 'swing'.

N-S take 23 fewer tricks between set-up 1 and set-up 2.

Um, 23 fewer tricks? I don't think so. They took 13 tricks in setup 1. 23 fewer would be -10. They didn't take -10 tricks, they took 3 tricks. That is a swing of 10 tricks.

If I play 1nt= I, declarer, took 7 tricks and my opponents took 6. If instead at the other table they play 1nt-1 declarer took 6 tricks and opponents took 7. That is a swing of 1 trick from declarer to defender. That isn't a swing of 13 tricks!

Mb:

If YOUR SIDE takes 13 tricks in a setup and only 3 in another, THAT is a swing of 10 tricks.

We are talking TOTAL TRICKS available to BOTH SIDES in the 2 setups - 26 total tricks - NOT 13.

The designation of what the 'difference' is if N-S take 3 tricks instead of 13 - and if E-W take 10 tricks instead of N-S taking 13 CANNOT BE THE SAME THING.

One is a 'difference'. The other is a 'swing'.

If you think that N-S scoring 500 instead of 1500 (a difference of 1000) and N-S scoring 500 instead of EAST-WEST scoring 1500 (a swing of 2000) amount to the same thing, I wouldn;t want you on my Swiss Team!

See the distinction I am trying to make now?